Charles R. Morrison v. Michael F. Colley

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206
File Name: 06a0361p.06
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
_________________
CHARLES R. M ORRISON et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
M ICHAEL F. COLLEY et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
X---->
,--
N
No. 06-4216
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus.
No. 06-00644—George C. Smith, District Judge.
Argued: September 20, 2006
Decided and Filed: September 22, 2006
Before: SILER, GILMAN, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
_________________
COUNSEL
ARGUED: David R. Langdon, LANGDON & HARTMAN LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellants.
Patrick J. Piccininni, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR THE COUNTY OF
FRANKLIN, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: David R. Langdon, Curt C. Hartman,
Joshua B. Bolinger, LANGDON & HARTMAN LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, Christopher P. Finney,
FINNEY, STAGNARO, SABA & KLUSMEIER CO., L.P.A., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellants.
Patrick J. Piccininni, Nick A. Soulas, Jr., PROSECUTING ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR THE
COUNTY OF FRANKLIN, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.
______________________
INTERIM OPINION
______________________
PER CURIAM. Charles R. Morrison challenges the defendants’ actions that have prevented
him from being placed on the ballot to run as an independent candidate for Congress from the 15th
Congressional District in Ohio. On September 12, 2006, the district court denied Morrison’s request
for injunctive relief that would have required the defendants to place him on the ballot. This appeal
followed.
Having considered the record, the briefs, and the arguments of counsel, the panel is of the
unanimous opinion that the judgment of the district court should be AFFIRMED. We reach this
conclusion essentially for the reason that, despite any constitutional infirmities that may exist in the
relevant Ohio statutes as they might apply to others, there is no reasonable basis for Morrison to
claim in good faith that he is not affiliated with a political party. A more detailed opinion will
1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 06-4216 Morrison et al. v. Colley et al. Page 2
follow as soon as practicable. This abbreviated opinion is issued in the interim due to the urgent
need for Ohio election officials to proceed with their preparations for the upcoming election.

-- 2 of 2 --